Comment Moderation Thread

The purpose of this post and page is to allow comments regarding the moderation of posts on the site. Since the inception of this blog, the moderators have repeatedly asked that such matters are dealt with by private email.

Unfortunately, many people disregard these requests for reasons not immediately apparent to the moderators. We have come to the conclusion that people like to have readership of their penmanship, no matter what the subject matter may be 🙂

From now on, if posters make complaints on the main blog about moderation, the posts will not – as previously – be deleted. Instead they will be moved here.

The same common sense rules of respect and decency that apply on the main blog are still in operation though.

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

140 thoughts on “Comment Moderation Thread

  1. I notice my post about a recap on this weeks events has been deleted
    Could you give me a reason why

  2. tcup2012
    Certainly. Your posts CONTAIN TOO MUCH SHOUTING! That, allied to your heavy use of pejorative and insulting language in the post in question (which you describe rather fancifully as a recap on the week’s events) has led to your being placed in moderation meantime.

    The SFM isn’t an anger wall for people to spray-paint insults about those they don’t like or agree with. It is a place for information exchange and debate. We are all guilty to some extent of throwing the odd insult around, but when a post contains NOTHING ELSE we have to draw the line.

    Please turn off the caps lock and refrain from fanzine style cheerleading.

  3. [TSFM – Feel free to disagree, but that’s not how we conduct ourselves here.]

    It’s your ball and your rules, and I accept that’s the way this site is run.

    My issue is your claim that Insult is the intellectual enemy of debate

    I can’t ever recall attending any debate where insult and put downs were not the heart and soul of of the argument.

  4. Drew Peacock says: (315)
    October 17, 2013 at 2:16 pm

    Greenock Jack says: (58)
    October 17, 2013 at 2:11 pm
    It’s called debate.
    You might not like the questions or the answers but that’s life.
    No it’s not. It’s part of the ancient game of deflection and distraction sometimes called “oh look everyone – there’s a squirrel”

    It continues to amuse and frustrate me that whenever anyone asks a question that does not fall into the narrow “Rangers bad” theme, they are accused of squirrel-hunting.

    That itself sounds like deflection and distraction to me.

  5. Night Terror says: (376)
    Rate This

    In this particular case Greenock Jack’s only point seems to be ‘we’re aw doomed without Sevco’. He claims not to be advocating a catapult of Sevco into the top league so there appears no constructive contribution here other than to tell us all how rubbish and much worse off we will be without Sevco.

    We are all acutely aware that Scottish Football faces many challenges. Thank you for the reminder but it was quite unecessary.

    Squirrels, squirrels, squirrels, squirrels, squirrels, squirrels, squirrels…

  6. MoreCelticParanoia
    Try reading it again.
    You should read posts with a more open mind, others did and engaged in debate.

    It’s ironic, some on here say they want a balanced media and then cry ‘small hairy animals’ if they don’t like what they read or can’t comprehend thought outwith their own postcode.

  7. The “Click to edit” function is gone. Boo hoo.

    I can understand that people maybe shouldn’t be able to ‘change their tune’ by re-working controversial posts, but as an aid to grommiticol corractniss it will be missed.

    Was it coupled to the TU/TD function?

  8. TSFM says: (547)
    November 7, 2013 at 11:10 pm

    Angus1983 says: (1222)
    November 7, 2013 at 10:13 pm (Edit)

    On occasion the blog tips too far towards Celtic-mindedness and I just canna resist trying to tip it back towards neutrality, that’s all.

    Tipping it into stupidity is worse. You can always debate partisanship. You can’t argue with daft.

    In that case we won’t be able to resist moderating it out.

    You have basically just admitted to deliberately trolling – and wearing that as a badge of honour.

    Grow up – or if you want to do stand up, or be at the top of the bill somewhere, there are opportunities available. Just not here.

    A wee bit below the belt TSFM!

    Angus is no troll! I actually quite like reading his posts as he genuinely does try to give a neutral point of view, along with a bit of humour as well.

    You could have at least posted his full post along with your response instead of taking your headline sentence from it.

    Just for future clarity, does criticising Celtic FC or CFC Supporters mean the Author is a Troll?

    Why open a can of worms at this time?

  9. Stupidity … Daft … Trolling badge of honour … Winding up … Indulgent … Grow up?

    Wow, just wow!

    There is a general perception around other forums that this blog is something of a Celtic-minded place. I fervently hope against hope that this is not the case, as I’m sure many of us do. To be called a number of names (not least by the blog’s owner) for quietly and as diplomatically as possible asking for comments on CFC’s declared intent of the upholding of Scottish football’s reputation in Europe, and how it applied to some (28 arrests, I believe) of those present in Amsterdam is kind of evidential, though.

    Yes, my post was provocative, in the sense of attempting to provoke a response. This is not automatically trolling. I am not sitting here rubbing my thighs thinking “wahey, this’ll wind the buggers up!”. Believe it or not.

    The perception that I actively dislike Celtic and/or its supporters is redolent of the “Rangers Hater” scenario, whereby if you don’t exhibit a full and active backing of something then you must be a Hater. Balderdash.

    (Aye, Mulgrew’s booking was of course eventually confirmed, but there remains the (afaik unproven) allegation that the referee didn’t actually record it at the time in his match report. This may be Aberdeen paranoia, or it may be not.)

  10. TSFM
    Finally, I am rather surprised that Greenock Jack has chosen to comment, as his contribution was made a short while after he mailed the mods asking to be “perma-banned”, averring, ” I promise I won’t make a fuss about it!”. This for reasons totally unknown to the mod who received the mail. I assume that this mail was sent shortly before his namesake begun spinning the Amsterdam story.

    TSFM, please allow me to reply.

    That is misleading and it also betrays the confidence of what I thought to be private channel of communication.

    Why misleading ?
    A “short while” will be assumed to be a handful of hours or at least after my previous post (Wednesday evening). I made that request a number of days ago (IIRC Sunday night/ 5 days and a whole lot of posts ago) I was peeved and had in that moment had enough of being what I preceived to be wrongly and repeatedly accused of deflection. During which time I had actually posted on the board for the mods to ban me if they thought deflection to be the case.

    So you can’t assume anything re.Amsterdam because the Celtic support were still in Glasgow or had at least not arrived in Amsterdam. As for the other Jack reference, you don’t know how far you are off the mark with that one, I believe spin to be a modern day cancer on society.

    The fact that I tend to see things differently will naturally mean I will attract verbal jousting but let me get on with it (within the guidelines) instead of the above type of misleading reply or instead ban me.

    I haven’t had much time in the last couple of days, nor will over this weekend and I had come onto reply to Resin but found this post. I’ll try and get back to you later today.

    Moving on

    Balance and Consistency
    The matter of Amsterdam has certainly hit the headlines and I’ll repeat what I said yesterday, if using consistency on here, football supporters should simply condem the disgraceful scenes and move on. Mitigating factors may exist but remember how they are roundly rejected and considered inadmissable if they come from the blue side of the city.

    What about David Somers, any further links to the spivs on top of this mornings DR piece ?
    I saw his interview and he refused the opportunity to deny connections with those who are and have been involved with Rangers in the last couple of years.

  11. Angus 1983
    We can’t all like everybody but could you be more specific about you’re dislike of Neil Lennon?

  12. Boab – not really, cos last time I spoke about it I got banned until I apologised. 🙂

    Suffice to say that Mr Lennon’s background is well known to personnel who have served in Ireland, and it’s not pleasant (allegedly).

  13. helpmaboab says: (227)
    November 8, 2013 at 11:45 am
    Really boab? What’s to be gained in terms of monitoring Scottish football or a discussion about moderation on TSFM by being side-tracked with that kind of discussion?

  14. TSFM says: (1)
    November 8, 2013 at 8:50 am
    Tic 6709 says: (531)
    November 8, 2013 at 8:05 am

    Angus has had quite a bit of stick lately.
    Deserved, no. I like many others on here have seen many posts that have a dig at Celtic.
    He does it to wind people up,so what ?
    Because this isn’t the place to be winding people up. Quite the opposite, and it worries me that you think its okay to do so.
    I agree that people should be a little less sensitive than they are sometimes – particularly some of the Celtic fans on here, but someone who is deliberately winding others up is, well , trolling.
    From a personal point of view as a mod, there is a whole lot more work involved if people decide to indulge themselves in that way. I’d rather not be bogged down in that.
    Can I ask that any further discussion on this matter takes place on the comment moderation thread.

    Exiled Celt says: (771)
    November 8, 2013 at 1:57 pm
    Brenda – need a favour – need to borrow the clock/calendar
    Still waiting for Greenock Jack’s post of his opinion regarding the new chairman David Somer’s appointment………….unless he has been banned sine die on request by himself as per TSFM’s post!
    Brenda says: (701)
    November 8, 2013 at 2:12 pm
    Exiled Celt
    Anything to help can we even begin to imagine that the penny is starting to drop even with GJ???? After all the ‘new guy’ at the ‘new co’ has (allegedly) some historical links with ‘you know who’ and his ‘pal’ oh dear

    TSFM, does the above exchange fit into the trolling category or is just fair banter?
    For me this post sums up the reaction to the incidents in Amsterdam and the responses on here:

    beatipacificiscotia says: (192)
    November 8, 2013 at 8:50 am
    Tic 6709 says: (531)
    November 8, 2013 at 8:05 am
    I think there generally mixed feelings of dread and anticipation, with a sprinkling of frustration, that has led to this site to be more like “gossip at the Steamie” than a place for Insight and Analysis. There is far too much “he said, she said” and bickering for my liking. All the attention on Greenock Jack has been sad, pointless. Some of the regular posters on here are getting a bit over-sensitive. I think everyone needs to take a breath and calm down.

  15. Exiled Celt says: (773)
    November 8, 2013 at 2:42 pm
    Thanks Blu for reporting me! Noted! Chapeau!
    Exiled, apologies if that appeared like running away to clipe to teacher. I should have responded directly to you. Your post just looks like bear-baiting to me and I think that that’s unfortunate. Let’s talk about applying the rules without fear or favour and how the Scottish MSM could more accurately and even-handedly report on the game.

  16. Blu – sorry but that was exactly what it was – not appeared to be. I never come on here and the only reason I knew about your reporting was you posted it on the “wrong” thread – so I have now found this thread and see the post. I had asked GJ yesterday regarding the new apt instead of talking about other matters – since he is able to give us what the TRFC fans point of view. My own family have all lost interest and know and accept the new chairman is not there on their behalf – was wondering if that was the case with GJ. Apologies if this was badly worded or considered baiting – but he has a great history (like Adam) of making points and then disappearing like snow off a dyke when he is asked something.

    Appreciate your apologizing and accept it – thanks

  17. Angus1983
    Suffice to say I can understand why you were banned.

  18. Boab: “Suffice to say I can understand why you were banned.”

    Indeed. There are things which shall remain untalked about, eh?

    helpmaboab says:
    November 8, 2013 at 5:16 pm

    Why the snide asides?
    No snideness, trolling, stupidity or indulgence intended – presumably you refer to my “hoops” comment? Can I not note that I had a wee laugh at an obvious pun – albeit no doubt completely unintended by the intelligent chaps who thought the slogan up?

    Evidently my place is not here, which is a bit sad. Pointing out hypocrisy where Celtic or its fans are concerned, in however gentle a fashion, appears to be unacceptable on TSFM. Dog forbid a fellow should make a joke at their expense. It’s fairly plain that an over-riding respect for all things Parkhead is a prerequisite for attendance at this here table – a fellow has to think hard before posting anything that is not 100% supportive of Celtic.

    One has to seriously consider how to word things to make a point, and that’s approaching a level of self-censorship which I’m not happy with.

    I wish you all well. May this football season have a happy ending for you all (especially Bill1903). 🙂


  19. I haven’t been able to post a comment on the main thread since the Armed Forces debate of Sep 30th but this is a fine debating forum so I’ll try again ( and don’t mention the war ).
    Although I spout a load of nonsense mostly so maybe, I’ll stick to lurking.

  20. Noticed I had another post wiped this morning. Obviously I’m causing TSFM grief 👿 and it’s his baw. Don’t worry, you’ll get no more!

    No grief Yakutsi, just that insulting language in the direction of the moderator is just as unacceptable as insulting language directed at anyone else.
    But thanks for the assurances 🙂

  21. It seems I have just had a post juxtaposing “the minimum wage” and “a minimum wage” deleted.

    Can I ask why that was. I don’t think it was offensive, either in general or to a specific person.

    Moderation is fine, and indeed necessary, however there really has to be a reason for it. I would just like to know what the reason for deleting that post was .

    Removed mainly because of you “request” that others should state their allegiance before making comments. If the only people who were qualified to talk about the behaviour of any club are their own fans, we wouldn’t have a great deal to talk about on here.

    The Celtic AGM, whilst of general interest, is pretty much OT as far as TSFM is concerned.
    Your post introduced the concept of juxtaposition of minimum and living wage semantics. No-one else had done so, so in effect you were attributing sentiments to others which had not been expressed. Igniting partisan argument in this way over an essentially OT matter is not something mods are comfortable with.

  22. ” Your comment could not be approved “.
    And to think I used to admire such admonishment. Its no fun.
    I’ll go and stand in the corner.

  23. Thanks for the reply.

    In relation to the juxtaposition thing, as I recall someone specifically mentioned ” a living wage” which I believed misleading as that is not the same as “the living wage” which is a specific campaign. That is what the Celtic board was asked about

    I take your point with regard asking others about whether the club they support have subscribed to “the living wage”. I just thought it would be a bit disingenuous for people to be decrying the Celtic board for taking a position if they did not decry their own club if they took exactly the same stance.

    Anyway, thanks for explaining, I appreciate it.

  24. ecobhoy says: (2054)
    November 23, 2013 at 11:43 am

    On the living wage issue

    This is a generalised comment and probably has little actual significance wrt to football club staff but it is important when looking at the living wage issue which I support in principle.
    No offence, but this takes us down a line of political debate we’d rather not be involved in. We’ve tried to accommodate some talk of the issue (which is specifically a Celtic AGM related one and borderline OT) but I don’t think a deeper probing of the issue will be helpful to the blog.
    I reject that I treated the matter in a political way and also don’t see it as a specifically Celtic one and I made that clear in my comments.

    I would have thought anyone reading my post would have seen how complex a subject the implementation of the living wage is especially wrt football clubs because of the the large numbers of casual/matchday staff they tend to employ.

    Seems strange, in view of the number of earlier comments made on the subject by previous posters, that my post has been deleted as OT especially as the way the issue has been reported from the Celtic agm by the SMSM has been woeful.

    I am not the kind of poster who usually bothers about moderation and when it happens I think I have always accepted it without comment but on this occasion the rationale baffles me.

  25. Danish Pastry says: (1717)
    November 23, 2013 at 10:35 am

    On the living wage issue DP quoted the following from the Scotsman:

    “The argument by the Celtic chairman, Ian Bankier, that most of the lower-paid were match-day casual labour and, therefore, supplementing their income from their primary work, was a feeble attempt at a defence which simply body-swerved the moral point at the core of Findlay’s passionate protest. It is that, to comply with the club’s supposedly traditional rectitude, no employee, in any capacity, should earn less than the living wage. Clearly not given to pussyfooting, she referred to the board’s decision as “one that shames you and shames us”.

    As i have made clear I dealt with the match day employees’ position in some detail and it unsettles me somewhat that the Scotsman’s views aren’t regarded as OT and deleted but mine, on the same subject, are.

  26. Rather pissed off that my post to Greenock Jack re worry about bombs and bullets at the club again was the reason why PL did not make a definitive statement about Sevco/Newco/Oldco/Hedgeco. This happens constantly. Is Greenock Jack TSFM?

    Wouldn’t mind so much if a reason was given. Can you please explain why it was deleted. Was there a request from him (again) or did TSFM decide to eradicate it? If so, why? Irony overload, this blog is supposed to be about accountability!

  27. I posted yesterday @ 9.33 pm on politics inside football grounds pointing out that the poppy is also a political symbol. The post has been removed. TSFM, could you explain that deletion for me please?

    Yes. It is debatable that the poppy is a political symbol. It may have been hijacked in the same way as the Union flag, but many would also argue that it is most definitely NOT political . Consequently it is not appropriate for us to have that conversation on TSFM.

  28. Galling fiver says: (51)

    December 1, 2013 at 2:31 pm

    We have now reached a point that in order to engage with the offending mob, that we have to accept their offerings in whatever form it comes in, just so they will contribute.

    This place and RTC have been a revelation to me, opened my eyes, and indeed softened my attitude to the growing problem being caused by one club and their offspring, assisted by the usual suspects of the last 125 years. Nothing has changed really, just got worse.

    I don’t know why I had a comment removed earlier other that what I have said in my first sentence, but this will be the last comment I will have removed.

    Good luck, and farewell.
    My post following yours in which I agreed with you was also removed.
    My post contained no insults or banned words,it was just a throwaway comment about circular arguments.
    I hope you don’t leave the blog because of what happened.
    We will just have to phrase any criticism differently.

  29. Ok, message understood, apologies about my inference of childishness related moderation. So the mob is not the mob, and they are superior because the blog needs them, they’ll be chuffed to bits. Keep up the fight chaps.

    GF – I don’t know exactly what you mean by the edit above, The thread post was not authored by me. However your comment was removed because of your characterisation of a group of people which is very un-TSFM like and inappropriate.

  30. Tic 6709 says: (565)
    December 1, 2013 at 2:49 pm
    Galling fiver says: (51)
    December 1, 2013 at 2:31 pm

    My post following yours in which I agreed with you was also removed. My post contained no insults or banned words,it was just a throwaway comment about circular arguments. I hope you don’t leave the blog because of what happened. We will just have to phrase any criticism differently.
    Galling fiver I would echo what Tic 6709 has said and hope you reconsider. On any blog where trolls/deflectors operate then their success – especially when they are working to a PR script – is measured by the amount of posters they ‘sicken’ so that they walk-away.

    I make no comment on the activities of posters on here whose motives might be suspect to some other than personally to ignore posts by anyone – especially new posters – whose offering are to me ‘iffy’.

    I learnt a long time ago on various blogs that there can be no accommodation with people on a mission and no possibility of advancing the debate or actually coming to an understanding of an opposing point of view honestly presented and argued.

  31. @TSFM

    I see my post quoting Galling fiver and Tic 6709 has been removed to the Moderation Thread as has their posts. I am assuming that ny post was sent to moderation because it quoted the other two posts and therefore assume that was why my post was sent to moderation.

    I can see no reason for my post being morderated as it makes no accusation about anyone posting here being a troll but talks in general about trolling and my own attitudes towards it and how I deal with it. I genuinely can see nothing objectionable in my post.

    Another recent post of mine on the ‘living wage’ issue – as it effects football clubs in particular – was placed in moderation which bemused me especially as I read the slew of posts which followed which were allowed. I really don’t get too miffed about moderation and leave the decsion up to the moderators but it seems to me that there has been a not too subtle sea change in moderation policy for whatever reason.

    EB – I am dismayed by your implication that all posts moved to this thread are offensive 🙂
    I assure you that no offence is taken – merely that the subject is appropriate to this thread.
    I can also assure you that there has been no change to the moderation policy – nor has it ever been subtle 🙂

  32. I believe you do on the whole a very good job scanning, moderating and so on, to produce a first class blog, frequented by excellent contributors. But could there be times when you need to reassess your input?

    You deleted a post of mine. No big deal. You’ve deleted better posts than that. I asked you why. You gave as the reason that the point I made is debatable, and many would argue most definitely against it.

    Not true and you know that. That is not the reason your post was removed. I await your apology

    These are grounds for censorship? Do you actually believe comments are inappropriate because they are debatable and that people would argue strongly against them? On a blog on Scottish football, and in its current state?
    Can you be serious?

  33. I see Geronimo’s post and my own, which passed comment on the continued, overt, militaristic / political statements being propogated have been deleted.

    Censored for expressing a (valid?) opinion?

    Suppression of expression whilst others are allowed to continue tub-thumping.

  34. I quote :-

    “asking the questions the media won’t ask”

    🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁

  35. Could anyone enlighten me as to why the OCNC thread is called ‘Bonkers OCNC’?

  36. jean7brodie says: (385)
    December 5, 2013 at 9:34 pm
    2 2 Rate This

    Could anyone enlighten me as to why the OCNC thread is called ‘Bonkers OCNC’?
    a. TSFM wishes to stigmatize anyone who has an opinion on the matter as bonkers.
    b. TSFM wishes to stigmatize anyone who argues that the old club has died is bonkers
    c. TSFM wishes to stigmatize anyone who argues that the old club survives is bonkers
    d. The debate is driving him/her bonkers
    e. All of the above

  37. jean7brodie says: (385)
    December 5, 2013 at 9:34 pm

    Could anyone enlighten me as to why the OCNC thread is called ‘Bonkers OCNC’?


    b – e of what HP said (if you leave out the emotional spin) 🙂

  38. TSFM
    You should publish these posts as they are funny and lighthearted 😀

  39. TSFM
    Why have you removed my reply to your post.

    More than happy to publish if you leave out the sarcasm and abuse – and answer the question …

  40. Hi TSFM,

    What happened to my oxymoron joke?
    Did you remove it because you consider it offensive or because just not funny?

  41. I made two posts around midnight which have been pulled.

    Am I banned, TSFM? If not, why were they pulled?

  42. TSFM

    Ach well, looks as flouncing in public is OK but sarcasm is out, I’ll ask a series of detailed questions the next time we get a flurry of “I’m not going to Parkhead” comments from the usual suspects.

    Enjoy the holidays

  43. Is there something corrupted in the main thread? Struggling to load comments by any media or view it properly by iPad? (other generic tablets are available!)

  44. TSFM says: (593)

    January 6, 2014 at 11:40 pm

    Please don’t post critiques of postings on other forums – particularly when the posts are wildly Off Topic.

    We are not here to discuss the mindset of Rangers players, officials or fans on the false premise that they are somehow a different breed. I think we have seen enough poor behaviour and attitude from fans of several other clubs in the recent past that should nail that myth.


    Since it was me that posted the one today – (edit – I see it has since been removed) – couple of questions on this just to be clear.

    So we cannot post or discuss anything from Rangers websites – but can post from Celtic, Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Hearts – or is it a blanket ban on anything from any other website including James Forest, Phil, Pie&Bovril etc – and is it also including newspapers etc?

    Not being argumentative – just so I am clear on what is being requested – not sure if others are also confused?

  45. Exiled Celt
    The key words are “critique” and “off topic”.
    Use of a moronic post from one forum to make a general point about the mindset of a group is also a problem here.
    We could cherry-pick from other forums and arrive at the same, predetermined conclusion.

    But we don’t do that here.

  46. TSFM

    I’ve had my post pulled asuggesting someone of being a rather poor tr0ll – surely that’s not a deletable offence – if I’d meant to play the man he’d be bleeding more than that – oh come on ref – fair’s fair 🙂

  47. briggsbhoy says:
    January 14, 2014 at 8:12 am
    3 0 Rate This

    Mr Salmold could spent money repairing the stadium but it still would not guarantee him votes in any election from a section of Sevco fans


    you removed my comment on an element of Celtic fans not supporting Salmond because YES vote = SNP = Salmond = Antisocial Behaviour at Football Bill = Anti-Celtic

    Salmond is damned either way and may get more mileage from the masons by helping the lodGERS than appealing to the Celtic support who have the above view

    but allowed Briggsbhoys point to stand

    no politics or some politics?

  48. Passing on a question on behalf of Galling Fiver – he seems to be having difficulties posting – not knowing the background, can you help him with his post or by sending a PM to see what the problems are for him? Thanks TSFM.

  49. TSFM

    My post disappeared. Nothing on the post moderation thread. What happened?

  50. Allyjambo
    I may be wrong (though I am relating what I was told) and you may be right. But why should my post be removed? And if money was the only reason, why did Wallace take the ‘secret’ to his grave? And as he kept it a secret, how do you know?

    The sectarian angle that your post leads toward is of little relevance to this blog even if you had the evidence to back it up. The fact that it is little more than heresay about a dead man and his dead parents should have your post and our subsequent discussion removed.

    I didn’t say money was the only issue and like you I don’t know what else, if anything the ‘secret’ might have been.

    If there were any negative implications or pejorative use of the language about either Jock Wallace or his parents, then I would agree with you. But there aren’t. Also, there is nothing sectarian in AJ’s remarks at all. OT perhaps, but not offensive.
    The story is also not a new one though and has the same theme as other speculation surrounding his departure and contemporaneously, the attempted recruitment of Alex Ferguson and Jim McLean as manager – none of which is 2+2=1690 either

  51. TSFM,

    I posted earlier for an explanation as to why two recent posts of mine were deleted.

    I may have missed a response, but I would like to know what rules were broken, for future reference.

  52. I had 2 posts removed last night, could I have an explanation as to why this happened.

  53. The following post I made within the last 30 mins or so in response to a post by “tearsofjoy” has been removed from the main blog? Why? Do not see the problem?

    tearsofjoy says:
    This is ridiculous…
    You sir are a clown. The vitriol directed to Neil Lennon has nothing at all to do with anything from his playing days. There were/are many more players who were/are far more “combative” than Neil Lennon ever was who are free from the terrible abuse that Neil Lennon has been continually subjected too. You say that he is detested the length and breadth of Scotland and then cite some incident from what happened in England with Alan Shearer?
    To take your position is to be disingenuous in the extreme.
    Unfortunately Neil Lennon is the subject of such abuse for a small number of very obvious reasons:
    He Is a Catholic from Northern Ireland who has the temerity to be sharp, witty, clever and damn good at what he does…which just so happens to be managing Celtic. I am absolutely pig sick of hearing people on here and in the media trot out this pash that it is because of the type of guy he is. Well actually, that is probably true if they mean being the successful Northern Irish catholic Celtic manager type of guy.
    • This is a man who has been actually and seriously physically attacked on a number of occasions.
    • This is a man who has had to suffer a long line of death threats.
    • This is a man who was physically attacked on the touchline at a football game while he was only trying to do his job.
    • This is a man who has had to move his young family at short notice on police advice on a number of occasions for their own safety
    • This is a man who has had live ammunition sent to him in the post.
    • This is a man who had letter bombs sent to him in the post.
    Ah…but ..never mind…it is all because of “what he did in his playing days”. Sorry if you really believe that then you are either deluded, in denial, or just plain stupid.
    I repeat …if you really think that then you are a buffoon. However I do not actually believe that you are that stupid which makes your motives even worse.

  54. another post removed? why?

    “Very puzzled and disappointed to see my post in response to the assertions made by “tearsofjoy” has been removed. I don’t believe I posted anything untoward or controversial. Simply rebutted, in my humble opinion, the ridiculous statements made in the previous mentioned post. I see that for some reason the post from “tearsofjoy remains” but my rebuttal has been removed?…poor form TSFM on such an emotive issue….again IMHO….

    I reposted on the comment moderation thread……”

  55. peterjung
    I am surprised that you are surprised. The first five words of that post was abuse of another poster. Wasn’t a simple rebuttal at all. It is th sort of post that makes moderation easier though.

  56. TSFM says:

    February 2, 2014 at 2:39 pm
    I am surprised that you are surprised. The first five words of that post was abuse of another poster. Wasn’t a simple rebuttal at all. It is th sort of post that makes moderation easier though.
    If my calling of the original poster “a clown” was the reason for the removal then fair enough….

    I respect your call… equally I stand by my original assertion of the post by “tearsofjoy”..

    This is a deadly serious issue…..I was simply appalled and more than a little angry at the way it was characterised by the original poster. That was the intent behind my post.

    Anyway….as I say I respect your call even if I disagree with the judgement. Regardless I appreciate your response to explain.

    Love and peace to all 🙂


  57. How does it help debate if posts that don’t fit into the New Speak New Truth paradigm are summarily removed without explanation?

  58. TSFM
    an earlier post today seems to have disappeared. Not aware of any rules broken. Any comment for future reference?

  59. The TDs to my post at 7:46 are very revealing. Clearly I am ruffling some TSFM clique feathers with my posts tonight on another subject, as in other circumstances I have no doubt that my 7:46 post would have a different reaction. Don’t expect the TU/TD ratio for 7:46 to change, but a sad reflection on the site. Looking forward to being deleted.

Leave a Reply